Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (113 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-buildservice] BS provides no benefit for me
  • From: Adrian Schröter <adrian@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 29 May 2006 13:04:36 +0200
  • Message-id: <200605291304.36129.adrian@xxxxxxx>
Am Monday 29 May 2006 12:53 schrieb Pascal Bleser:
> Christoph Thiel wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 May 2006, Pascal Bleser wrote:
> >>>> And Christoph because you might want to check whether you've got all
> >>>> of those patches in the SL10.1/Factory smart RPM (but if you do a new
> >>>> build, please don't have a release >= 25 that supersedes my package
> >>>> again ;D).
> >>>
> >>> I'll check our smart package soon. Now, that we have the openSUSE
> >>> Build Service up and running, we might consider working on the smart
> >>> package together and share the maintainership. How about that?
> >>
> >> I don't think so.
> >>
> >> Well, we could, and I would base my own spec on the one in the build
> >> service (though there wouldn't be any benefit for me, rather the
> >> opposite, it would be more work).
> >>
> >> The buildservice is not interesting to me ATM because
> >>
> >> 1) the buildservice is not advertised anywhere as a repository for
> >> packages (as opposed to > 50% of SUSE Linux users already using my
> >> repository)
> >
> > We will be promoting the Build Service very aggressively soon. A
> > re-design of the web frontend is on the way and the commandline tools
> > already work very well (IMO).
> OK. But the web frontend currently is only targeted at packagers
> AFAIK. I really mean the end-user side of things.
> Don't know whether there are plans to also design an interface that's
> usable for end-users. And if so, what those plans look like.

Yes, we do plan to have also an end user web front end. And a GUI tool as

> Unfortunately, it's all happening behind the SUSE curtain :(

We do develop in the public svn. Have a look esp. at the TODO file. Andreas is
currently heavily working on the new web frontend, which is the reason that
the current installed one on build.o.o does not change ...

> Navigating the BS repositories/directories is currently a PITA because
> there's no real concept for how those should be organized (I *don't*
> think putting stuff into home:/home:pbleser/smart would be a good
> idea, for example).

The projects and also this dirs are caused by technical issues in first place.
It is not intended to have everybody to search through all those directories.
Yes, we do need a search functionality and a end-user usable browsing
interface. This is what the team is working on atm.

> There must be a single summary page that lists all the projects and
> packages that are in the BS.



> >> But as for maintaining the smart package for Factory, yes, we could do
> >> it together in the BuildService (if that's already feasible with the
> >> current implementation of BS) so when I add patches to my package, I can
> >> also add them to the smart project in the BuildService.
> >
> > Exactly -- have you tried osc (the python cmdline client to the openSUSE
> > Build Serivce)?
> I gave it a quick shot which was not very concluding, but mostly
> because I didn't know where to create my projects (sent a mail to
> opensuse-packaging two weeks ago but no reply, and it's been
> reorganized anyway).
> I definitely have to give it another shot. osc is obviously the
> approach that I prefer and suits me best, a simple CLI client (and not
> a web frontend).
> Thanks to Peter for writing it :)
> I don't want to discard or discredit your efforts on the BuildService,
> but I really don't see any advantage for me in using it at the moment,
> it's rather the opposite:
> - I build for SUSE 9.1 -> 10.1, and only 10.0, 10.1 and Factory are in
> the BS as of now (AFAIK)
> - no web frontend for end-users as I'll have with Packman
> Note that I don't care at all about building for other distributions.
> What would make the BS more compelling to me would be to have a ppc
> build target (and providing what I'm missing, above ;)).
> Of course, that's my very personal POV, in the light of building
> packages that are not provided at all on SUSE Linux or that could only
> be built as a crippled subset because of potential legal/patent issues.
> It's a totally different case concerning packages that are already in
> the distribution, that I could co-maintain directly and that are built
> as full-fledged because they're not in the gray legal/patent realm.

I think we do have different goals with the build service and with packman.
Which is complete okay. But we should have of course an ongoing discussion
where we can work together to avoid double work.



Adrian Schroeter
SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nuernberg, Germany
email: adrian@xxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
Follow Ups